"Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:g6s07a$8rq$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "cr88192" <cr88192@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:942ea$48904ce0$7937c448$25715@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> I suspect that this kind of thing is a kind of common human dream, to
> always
>> have something or someone lower that can be denigrated, despised, and
>> exploited, so that people can be better and rise above those who are
>> below
>> themselves.
> ...
>
> But, is that how most people act when they do have something lower? I'd
> say, "No." We have pets. The vast majority of people treat them
> humanely.
> But, yes, some do as you said. However, some even treat them as
humans...
>
ok, so I guess it is the idea that things like racism, religious
intellerance, ... are the result of people disliking equality, rather than
out of a sense of actual superiority?...
>> for example, when there are near-human androids, then probably most
>> people
>> will be able to give up, for example, their despise of blacks, jews,
...
> in
>> the form of finding something new to despise...
>
> Or, more likely, they just add another group to the list: androids.
They
> most likely will add a few other groups to the list: scientists who
> created
> them... politicians who legalized them... judges who sup****ted them...
> police who protected them... When you have tens of thousands of
extremely
> upset Americans, those people are dead.
>
that is an alternative possibility.
I had considered that people would buy them, and basically treat them like
slaves, but actually disliking them in this sense, had not been
considered.
>> > If you create intelligent androids, you'll make the situation worse.
>> > There
>> > will be plenty of newly unemployed Americans, in addition to the
> abundance
>> > of poor workers already here, that will be available for work. You'd
> need
>> > to solve the "how to provide an equitable lifestyle to most Americans
>> > without them working" problem prior to unlea****ng numerous androids
>> > into
>> > the
>> > workforce. I.e., you'd need to find a solution that would put an end
>> > capitalism and monetization of goods and services, without resorting
to
>> > communism or socialism, etc. IMO, that would require the ability to
>> > produce
>> > a huge set of identical resources and custom resources from which
each
>> > individual would choose what they want and need. The identical
>> > resource
>> > problem can't be solved for things which are rare. But, for many
> things,
>> > it
>> > can be. With a zero-cost, infinite source of electrons, nearly all
>> > manufacturing and farming could progress to an exceptionally low cost
>> > structure. With such a source of electrons, you could purify ore for
>> > free,
>> > manufacture pure water, farm food in skyscrapers with lighting, make
> fuels
>> > and medicines, etc. etc. on a huge scale for little or no cost. The
>> > remaining costs for many industries would just be any human labor and
> any
>> > limited natural resources. Such an energy source, one that is far
far
> far
>> > beyond the needs of humanity for thousands of years, could set the
> ground
>> > work for such a society.
>> >
>>
>> that or the remaining workforce either has to strive to work in higher
>> industries,
>
> How much higher industry does a country need (as a percentage of the
> population)? 10%? 30%? 70%? At some point, it's becomes obvious that
> you've got more higher industry than what's needed in reality... That
> leaves a large part of the population unemployable.
>
potentially, but then again, they will still have to compete...
>> or compete with the mechanized workforce.
>
> As you pointed out, that's not cost effective for employers... ;-)
And,
> of
> course, if the android is highly intelligent, because it's most
profitable
> for the manufacturer to make them that way, it's not cost effective to
> hire
> people for higher industry... since they (humans) won't be as bright as
> the
> android, will exhibit random variation in intellect, skills, and
> performance, and will cost much more to employ.
>
it depends I guess on what are the relative merits of each, since both are
likely to have differing traits.
as I view it, intelligence is not the only marketable skill, and there are
likely to be many that machines are not good at.
>> labor then becomes a
>> commodity resource of sorts...
>
> What do you do with lots of people who have nothing to do and no way to
> earn
> a living? I.e., if we can't solve the problem for small inner city
gangs
> (25-50K people per large city), how to we handle 30%, 50%, or 90% of 350
> (or
> so) million Americans?
>
yeah, that is an interesting problem...
possibly it could work like this:
in the absence of stuff that needs to be done, people make more stuff to
do.
work gets done too fast, make more beuracracy and pay people to sit at
desks
twiddling papers and attending meetings...
maybe people get really good at having long elaborate debates about
nothing?...
maybe a whole lot of jobs turn into something analogous to clergy?...
in any case, people will probably find something to do, people are good at
this...
>> then again, modern technologies have largely eliminated many kinds of
>> jobs
>> as well (cotton picking, factory workers, meat-processing workers,
>> textile
>> workers, m***** of people calculating numbers and filling in charts and
>> tables, ...), these jobs are not well missed.
>
> Many of those jobs still exist. It's just that fewer of them exist in
> America... Many of them have been moved to lower cost locations.
Factory
> and meat-processing still exist on a large scale in the US, but not as
> large
> as a century ago... E.g., we don't ex****t cattle to be processed in a
> foreign abattoir, just to be reim****ted. etc.
>
yeah, and a lot of it is done with machinery as well...
oh well, there is little to imply I am actually in the US (for what it is
worth, here is not the US...).
after all, a little to the north is Japan, and a little to the west is
Taiwan, and south of here is Singa****e...
likewise, the local populous is multilingual, English being the de-facto
language.
of course, lived in the US before though...
>
> Rod Pemberton
>
|
